Thoroughbreds

In this relaxed thriller, Lily (Anya Taylor-Joy) is a very unhappy teen living in a very uncomfortable lap of luxury. She hates her step-father (Paul Sparks) but suppresses and hides her emotions. One person she can't hide from is her childhood friend Amanda (Olivia Cooke). When they reconnect after a while, Amanda admits that she is incapable of feeling emotion, and as a result is perceptive enough to see through Lily's mask. She's also supremely cold and logical, so when she suggests that Lily might murder her mean step-father, the idea... rather takes hold.

Good breeding doesn't mean beans when it comes to the human heart.

The prominent feature here is character study. It's character study mostly by observation because characters never analyze themselves and when they analyze each other is more often says more about the character doing the analyzing. We watch them interact and make decisions and slowly a clear picture emerges. The movie utilizes every facet at its disposal, both in technical film techniques and the more organic ones, creating a machine of many moving parts that work together to point to the same conclusion.

On the "well, duh" side: casting, acting, and characterization. Olivia Cooke's naturally blank deadpan is fascinating in that you would never learn a thing about her from watching her face. For her, we must look to body language, dialogue because Amanda is an honest person, and decisions. Decisiveness is important to Amanda and she has a solid, if skewed view of morality. With Anya Taylor-Joy, her emotions boil under her face, and while she tries to hide behind a stone mask, what does leak through is the good stuff. Emotion drives her and overcomes her sense of morality.

Who's the real psycho here...?

These two characters are almost opposites, and as such they inform our understanding of each as we compare them. Then you must add Anton Yelchin's character to the mix, because without his Tim, there's not quite an ideal balance. Tim is older, less privileged, already has mistakes under his belt, and aspires to be like the two girls already are. He wants wealth and power, and think he has what it takes to achieve that through dealing drugs. But without anti-social disorders or a lifetime of oppressed emotion and lying, that's a path that he's surprisingly ill-equipped to take.

Next, and probably my favorite aspect of the film is the camerawork. Long Takes is the name of the game, but not in a showy, complicated, "look at me" kind of way. It's simple: the camera is placed in a spot where it can view a whole scene with only adjusting focus as a character moves in and out... and it watches. It doesn't decide for us which part of the performance is the most telling; it stays out of our way. Zoom-ins are used to express importance of the moment, and there's plenty of shot-reverse-shot too. I think the idea was to capture the story and character is the simplest, most comfortable, and most effective way possible.

Love him. There's still movies of his I haven't seen, but I never want to finish them.

You don't want to notice shot length or the reasoning behind a shot composition while watching; you just want it to make the desired effect. With this not showy but intentional method, it did its job -- I had to watch it again to pick up on it fully, spurred by the longest oner -- a three-minute one that was masterful. I adore watching films with minimal cutting and being able to see performances play out -- to be allowed to look at what I want to, instead of the camera's framing forcing me to look somewhere where I don't see performance coming from. When a performance is as good as this cast gives, different people will see it in different places.

Even with their backs to the camera they are still readable, and when they're off screen the sound effects take over, and you'd might be surprised at how telling they can be too. Paring the heightened moments that would tend to overload down to only sound focuses the tension and engages the imagination. And it allows the film to keep it's deliberate, relaxed pace even through the crazier parts. The soundtrack also needs a mention: it's mainly spastic tribal drums which is hilariously fitting to the otherworldly setting. At one point a character's running footsteps could be easily confused for scoring too.

It's all so wonderfully strange.

Despite dark subject matter and the character study of extremely flawed humans that you'd rather be fascinated by than identify with, the film is well grounded in entertainment. Richly comic in wonderfully subtle and dark ways that works alongside the film's other moods for beautiful and unexpected combinations. My favorite bit was Ave Maria playing as Tim slow-motion smells soap and caresses a shiny red car in Lily's fancy house. Drop-dead gorgeous. I also loved watching the girls act in front of mirrors, and the neat detail where Amanda only uses the pawns and knights as she plays chess with herself.

Thoroughbreds is stimulating to watch, never lacking visual interest on screen that draws the eye and engages the mind, so even as the film moves casually and methodically it is not for one second boring. Its fascinating characters aren't spelled out for us, and the final delivery isn't a message or moral, but simply a few character journeys that will make you think hard about their situation, their burdens, and their decisions. We are invited not to judge, but to understand -- as we are entertained by the film's lavish, well-bred existence.

Upcoming Movie Roundup - March

February started out with the surprise release of The Cloverfield Paradox on Netflix. I had already dubbed it "The Month of Scifi," so unexpectedly springing one of the year's most anticipated scifi movies at us was perfect beginning. Of course the movie itself wasn't perfect, and divided opinions among fans. Still I enjoyed it very much. Read my review here!

Then I went to the theater to see Black Panther, but still didn't manage to see The Death Cure. Sadness. Black Panther was a Marvel movie, and did basically everything that entails. Didn't hate it, didn't love it. Read my review here!

We started the Netflix TV show Altered Carbon (and are currently two eps from the end) and I was pretty disappointed, because while the world is nice and scifi, and it had a noir-type premise, the feel of it is very normal for TV shows today, and I'm not finding it terribly compelling. Whenever I finish maybe I'll review it and see if I can figure out and express exactly how it fails.

But no matter, because there is Mute. The trailer made this Netflix film look less noir than Altered Carbon, but that was because it didn't reveal any of the plot, but it turns out the plot is noir through and through, and I loved it. Mute is exactly what I mean when I say "I like the scifi-noir genre," and after worrying me with terrible critic reviews, blew me away and is currently my favorite film of the year. Read my spoiler-free review here!

March has five Fridays, so there's lots to get to -- I'll probably keep it brief. There's one movie at least that I absolutely must see no matter what, and lots more that looks interesting in various degrees. Hope y'all had a great February! What did you see that you liked? And what's looking good this month?



Death Wish
Mar 2nd; R
Bruce Willis action movie -- violence and guns and frontier justice! Probably won't be super great since it's a remake, but there's no denying the appeal.




Goldstone
Mar 2nd; R
This one says it's a noir. Is noir making a comeback? Looks like a mystery that is both intense and easy going at the same time. Nice tone and cinematography in the trailer. Neon plus the Australian Outback. Very neat combo. Good reviews too.




The Vanishing of Sidney Hall
Mar 2nd; R
The writing and mystery elements of this one is more interesting to me than the cast, but it stars Logan Lerman and Elle Fanning. Lerman is a writer who disappears without a trace to get away from the unpleasant fame following the publishing of his controversial book. Bad reviews so far, but considering Mute I'll be paying attention anyway...




A Wrinkle in Time
Mar 9th; PG
I never read the book, and from the looks of things I should put more priority on that than on going out to see this kids scifi/fantasy adventure. It looks like the sort of thing that I won't be able to resist watching eventually though, even if it isn't anything special.




Gringo
Mar 9th; R
There's some weird, crazy things going down in this trailer. Dark comedy, so that's great if it's done well, and a great cast too. Joel Edgerton, Charlize Theron, David Oyelowo -- and Sharlto Copley!




The Hurricane Heist
Mar 9th; PG-13
Yes, this movie is going to be stupid. And yes, that's half of why I absolutely must watch it. Even if I didn't my brother would make me because he loves stupid disaster movies. And this one has a heist that the heroes must thwart at the same time! But the other half of why I'll watch it is Toby Kebbell. So yes -- I'm there.




Thoroughbreds
Mar 9th; R
This isn't really the kind of plot I'd usually pay much attention to, but this will be the last film of the late Anton Yelchin's, so it worth mentioning on that alone. Also Olivia Cooke playing a sociopath is weirdly appealing.




Tomb Raider
Mar 16th; PG-13
Chances of this movie being good are... not good. Really very not good. But it'll probably have a decent run anyway, and action flicks can only be so bad -- as long as there's action, ya know? I'll watch it for cheap someday probably, just because of it's mainstream status. Alicia Vikander may elevate it a bit, but the trailer looks like a video game, and I'm not feeling it.




Journey's End
Mar 16th; R
WWI drama starring Sam Claflin, Asa Butterfield and Paul Bettany. Looks like a well made film.




7 Days in Entebbe
Mar 16th; PG-13
A telling of a true story where Israeli Special Forces rescue hostages of a terrorist plane hijacking in the 70's. It ends well, so that's nice, and stars Daniel Brühl and Rosamund Pike -- but as the terrorists. So I guess don't get too attached? Eddie Marsan appears to be the main good guy.




Pacific Rim Uprising
Mar 23rd; PG-13
John Boyega's turn in the seat -- er, turn to share the seat -- with... Scott Eastwood? Okay. Whatever, I think I get how this works, but I haven't actually seen the first one due to a distaste for Charlie Hunnam. But I did survive Legend of the Sword, so maybe now I should bite the bullet and see what this is all about. This trailer is certainly under no delusion about what kind of a movie it is.




Unsane
Mar 23rd; R
Is Claire Foy crazy? Or is she not? That's the biggest reason to see this right there. The curiosity. Anyway, this looks like a very effective thriller. The wide angle lenses and tall aspect ratio alone make it feel so intense and claustrophobic.




Isle of Dogs
Mar 23rd; PG-13
Stop-motion? I love stop-motion! Wes Anderson? I love Wes Anderson! I haven't seen his other stop-motion endeavor because I'm too cheap to buy the DVD apparently, and it isn't streaming anywhere I use. So I should consider going to the theater for this one I think. Or else I may never get the chance!




Ready Player One
Mar 29th; PG-13
Yes, I'm ready. Heck, I've been ready for TWO YEARS ever since I first finished the book and looked up the cast and director. Tye Sheridan in the lead, Simon Pegg and Mark Rylance supporting. And now there's Ben Mendelsohn as the villain and Olivia Cook as the love-interest. And Steven Spielberg directing a movie from a book that was inspired by the works of Steven Spielberg! Honestly the book wasn't even that great, but it has such great cinematic potential I'm stoked to see what they do with it. Naysay all you like. It might crash and burn, but I'm going to be excited and hopeful anyway! Just don't change the ending...



Lean on Pete
Mar 30th; R
Aw, this looks like such a great film. Coming of age, indie adventure and drama, horses... based on a book too, which puts even more confidence in the story quality. I definitely want to see this.

Charlie Bartlett

Some Spoilers.

One of the many movies I watched because of my love and appreciation of Anton Yelchin, and probably would have never even noticed otherwise. And likewise one of his many movies that wound up surprising me with unexpected greatness. Charlie Bartlett tells the story of a rich high school student who is kicked out of yet another private school and must attend a public school. Charlie's goal in life is to be popular, so he begins to use his rich-kid connections to deal prescription drugs to the student body. Along with listening to their problems and giving them advice, because hey, he's a nice guy.

"Would you like to talk about it?"

I've seen this film twice now, and both times was on TV and edited for content. The original is rated R, just for your information. Also, obviously, the film deals with mature and questionable content. The whole plot is about drugs, and the lead is a full-on drug dealer whichever way you slice it. It's also technically a teen dramedy and ticks all the boxes that usually requires. It touches on a lot of serious subjects and always seems to be on the verge of going down a path that is too dark. The first time I watched it, that all came as unexpected. I was just there to watch Anton and have a giggle, but the movie really is more than that. I sat down with it again yesterday with a totally different mindset, and this time the movie clicked for me.

This time I paid attention to what the movie is trying to say. On the surface it easily seems like a casually promiscuous movie full of characters doing objectionable things and getting away with it. But I was surprised at how morally upright it was in the end (comparatively) and at how good its message and themes were. The movie strikes a neat grey area by having Charlie do bad things with good intentions, particularly selling prescription drugs to students. He doesn't need the money; he does it for two reasons: One, he feel that it's important to be popular during high school years. And two, he actually does care for the students. He knows that they often can't or won't get professional help, and thinks he can be a good third option. And in a lot of ways he is.

The doctor is in.

He spends a lot of time listening to kids who have never had anyone listen to them before, and genuinely tries to help them. When his doling out meds backfires he even continues to listen and give advice free of charge. Charlie always seems to be in the pursuit of doing the right thing. And really this story is about him discovering what exactly the right thing is. He messes up a lot along the way, and almost in some permanent ways, but he mends his mistakes and he gets there, and it's very rewarding when he does.

What's really neat about this character is that, like the film that features him, his surface impression is actually very inaccurate to the real him. Charlie looks and acts like his life is well-put-together, but really he's just as confused and messed up as anyone. His obsession with being liked is very easy to relate to, and slowly we discover ever darker and deeper sides to him. Anger and insecurity which he keeps suppressed -- and even that he does with good intentions -- but it comes out slowly, and impressively subtly for a teen flick. Really I don't think this should count as a teenage movie. It's much too deep, and intricate, and thoughtful for that. Its biggest failings come when it tries to work within the teen flick genre and shortchanges itself.

Charlie's mother played by Hope Davis is excellent.

Anton Yelchin always gave enjoyable performances, but this stands out in a few ways. Firstly he was given a chance to really run wild with exaggerated performances bits. I loved all the scenes where he was at the piano, dramatically showing off. But also there are several moments that required intricate depth too. Like where the character himself his acting -- putting on a front to hide his real emotions -- and he portrays the real emotion and the emotion the character is trying to show. That can't have been easy at all. He pulled it off beautifully.

Also in the cast is Kat Dennings as the love interest Susan, and the school principle Mr. Gardner is her father, played by Robert Downey Jr. He gives a very good performance too. At first he seems like a bad guy, out to get Charlie like Mr. Rooney in Ferris Bueller's Day Off, but he becomes more and more clearly a mess too, with his own desire to be liked. And all that tension between him and Charlie finally culminates at the end in a great scene by the pool. I love that scene. It's the moment where the movie fully and finally transcends the teen flick genre. The stakes slowly climb during the whole film, and there both the characters are finally in over their heads and the facades come down. And then the drama resolves as forgiveness is passed around and things that were for so long right on edge of toppling into cynical tragedy turn around into happy and encouraging endings.

"Some days are better than others."

The theme of forgiveness is very strong, and there's also plenty to be said for loving your neighbor and selfless love (there is great, realistic examples of this shown between Charlie and his mother, and Susan and her dad), and the movie is also very understanding in pointing out the true unimportance of being liked just for the sake of being liked. "It's not the popularity; it's what you do with it," it says. And if a kid like Charlie can figure that out, I guess there's hope for the rest of us, too.

Sunshine Blogger Award

A big thanks to Katy of Oh So Geeky for tagging me for this! She came up with some fun questions, so lets get right to it! Rules:

To accept our award, we simply have to: 
Post the award on your blog
Thank the person who nominated you
Answer the 11 questions they set you
Pick another 11 bloggers
Send them 11 questions

Katy's Questions:


1. What movie surprised you the most this year? 
10 Cloverfield Lane. It was the only movie I went into casually, with no baggage and no expectations, and it completely and utterly blew me away.

2. If you published a memoir, what would you call it? 
The World Through Sarah-Tinted Glasses or some slightly silly, slightly witty reference to my perspective, and how I see the world by observing it.

3. What movie character would you love to see made as a FunkoPop (that hasn't been made already)?
I just saw on Twitter some mock-ups or something of Stranger Things characters -- Eleven and Barb! (Because Katy retweeted them, actually!) They were perfect and should be made! I would definitely consider buying a Chief Hopper one.

4. You can only place three movies into a time capsule for future generations. Which titles would you pick?
I'm gonna assume that this means more like my personal picks for future generations that encapsulates this time, and not that these three will be the only movies they will ever see -- because that is just way too much pressure even for hypotheticals. And I will say... Super 8, The Way, Way Back, and Captain America: The Winter Soldier.

5. Is there a movie that took you a couple of viewings to appreciate?
Hmm. Maybe Blade Runner? I didn't understand it at all the first time I saw it, and even now I still probably don't understand half as well as I should, but I do appreciate it now, and will keep on watching it and appreciating it more and more.

6. What actor/actress will make you watch a movie no matter how bad it might be?
I have frequently sat through movies just because the names of... Sam Rockwell, Karl Urban, Anton Yelchin, Cillian Murphy, and Michael Shannon have appeared in the credits. Some of them were very bad. Some are among my favorite movies of all time.

7. What actor/actress will make you less likely to see a movie?
I try not to let a actors influence me negatively towards movies. However, I'm am pretty prejudiced against Keira Knightly, and Kevin Costner.

8. If you had an opportunity to tell a director to their face how much they messed up a highly-anticipated movie, would you? What would you tell them?
I might have a few choice words for Zack Snyder -- over Man of Steel -- but no, I don't think I would tell it to his face. I just don't care that much. But if I did it would involve a lot of ranting about how stupid Kevin Costner's character is, and how pathetic Lois is, and how un-Superman-ish Superman is when he just lets thousands of people die -- and WHY IN THE WORLD DID HE THINK THAT WOULD MAKE A GOOD MOVIE?????? And then I'd be like, "nice job casting Michael Shannon as Zod though." (Actually, maybe that wasn't his call... actually maybe none of that was his call! Maybe I should be more irritated with the writers in this case.)

9. Can a soundtrack make or break a movie?
Absolutely. Though I think it's easier to make a movie with one. An excellent soundtrack can easily be the highlight of a movie, but it's a lot harder to make a terrible soundtrack that ruins a film!

10. What movie made you laugh recently?
Hail, Caesar! There were some moments in that movie that were so unexpectedly and absurdly funny that I couldn't help but burst out is actual, real laughter -- a that happens pretty rarely in films for me.

11. What movie(s) are you looking forward to seeing this fall?
The only one releasing this fall that I can think of off the top of my head is Doctor Strange. The excitement hasn't kicked in for that yet, but I expect it will. Also Arrival looks neat, and there's Jeff Nichols' new film Loving. I am already excited for Rogue One, but that's more in winter. I'm also looking forward to renting/buying all the movies I skipped over the summer, especially the ones that I didn't skip by choice!

I'm gonna opt out of the tagging people part of this one. Partly because I'm feeling too lazy to come up with 11 questions right now. But if you like these questions, and want to answer them then go ahead and do!

Star Trek Beyond

Spoiler-free.

When the trailer released, I was one of few people who thought it promised good -- a promise that needed to be made for the fans nervous about J. J. Abrams handing over directing reins to Justin Lin. Through that admittedly iffy trailer I saw where I thought this film was headed, and I liked it. Still after a while my excitement took a beating, and I was hesitant to see the film as soon as I did. Not because I thought it wouldn't be good anymore, but because I thought I wouldn't be able to enjoy it as it was meant to be enjoyed. But I was right where it mattered and wrong where it mattered; Beyond does everything that I expected it'd do, and was able to put a smile on my face.

The third installment of the rebooted franchise dials back on the scale, and narrows its focuses to character and action for a pleasant episodic feel. Jim Kirk and his crew are cut off from the federation, stranded on a strange planet in the far reaches of the galaxy, and face a mysterious and intimidating threat which they face with bold determination.

This movie isn't perfect, but it's going in the right direction. So boldly go!

Firstly, more than just the directing reins changed hands. This time round, Simon Pegg and Doug Jung did the writing, rather than J. J.'s regulars. The reason I had so much confidence in this movie from the start was because of Simon Pegg. Certainly less known as a writer, but anyone who knows his writing work knows that it's the type to inspire confidence. And he didn't fall short; to the uninitiated this film is indistinguishable from the last two. There's the same sharp action, the same comic relief that is actually funny and elicits a real laugh, the same serious tone used carefully to add depth and urgency, and those same "Star Trek" moments that cause cheesy grins.

But to those like me who are compelled to look under the surface, there are some differences. And differences I was all for, but these were not purposeful deviations from the formula, but rather elements that were attempts at copying previous successes that just don't land quite as confidently. Paying attention to the plot progression, a more than typical number of plot holes are distinguishable, and too much of the dialogue is used in exposition, trying to explain holes away. And there are a few contrivances that were necessary for the plot to work. There did seem to be a handful of moments of genuine inspiration -- and they were all kinds of fantastic -- but for the most part the plot exists to serve the action.

The best the plot does is create situations for the characters to shine.

There was no shortage of memorable action set pieces though they were sometimes worked into the story less than gracefully. There were two shots where the CGI was noticeable and almost humorously bad, otherwise the special effects are fine, though not exactly evoking of awe either. It also loses a sense of sophistication that the previous films had, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. This film has a ragtag aura that is interestingly appealing. The only thing the more blunt action caused that I didn't like was that the fighting and action was filmed too close, and often with too low lighting for us to get the full effect. But not quite too much that you can't tell what's going on. The grandeur and beauty of the setting seems to be only shown off because it's obligatory; it's still got some great artistic imagery, but it doesn't linger like I found myself wishing it would.

The themes are simplistic and not particularly thought-provoking, but there is a charm to experiencing an action flick that doesn't try to shoehorn its themes. There's friendship and camaraderie going on that feels like it wasn't even done on purpose it's so natural. Give Justin Lin a large cast of oddball characters, and he can make them mesh; and these characters take to his treatment like they were made for it. Captain Kirk battling the odds with his two opposite sidekicks is sometimes the only thing we need. And when Bones and Spock have scenes together, which they do often, they lightly bounce their opposing worldviews back and forth with a casual depth that is subtly epic. Their scenes are also the most consistently funny, in a true, organic way.

Two sides of the same coin if ever two people fit the bill.

Zachary Quinto has found that perfect balance of determined logic and suppressed but genuine emotion with his Spock. I doubt he'll ever be my favorite character, but the respect keeps going up. Bones is already one of my favorites though, and won't be losing his place any time soon. Karl Urban always has been, and continues to be a fantastic Bones. The rough, sarcastic edge, the way he embraces his humanity (the good with the bad), and his innate lovable charm is all effortless from Urban. He gets even more to do this time around, and proves he deserves it and more. This time it's Uhura (Zoe Saldana) and Sulu (John Cho) who fall slightly to the wayside -- comparatively. They still have whatever they had from the last movies, but don't really add anything new or fresh.

I'm sure they'll come back around soon.

Ever underused is Chekov. Especially now, considering this is the last film in which the adorably quirky character will make an appearance. He was my favorite ever since he had all that trouble pronouncing his V's in movie one, and the Star Trek franchise won't be half as good in my eyes without him. Here he gets more to do than ever, but still isn't there nearly enough. The way the camera glances past him is maddeningly reminiscent of real life, but Anton Yelchin made the best of the part as he always did, and made the character unforgettable with his cute and awkward mannerisms, accent, and unconcealable charm. It's never pointed out to the audience even slightly, but I don't think I was seeing things when I noticed Chekov crushing on Jaylah, and it nearly broke me with adorableness. Chekov is an irreplaceable character -- there will be a gaping hole in every single installment to come.

I never knew you, but I'll miss you, and the characters you brought to life onscreen.

Now Jaylah (Sofia Boutella) is the obligatory new allied character, and is the best yet. That chic totally rocked. I loved her attitude and her unique, yet familiar persona. She's like a sullen, hardened teenager, yet is an alien with some naive and disarming fish-out-of-water qualities. She was cool, and funny, and had a great arc with a good amount of depth. I'd love to see her again. She hangs out a lot with Scotty, and they make for some sharp scenes together. Who knows if it was a temptation, but Simon Pegg didn't abuse his writing powers and give himself anything more to do as Scotty as he did before; but Scotty has always been a character worth devoting a good amount of time to, and he did match that. He's capable of holding down scenes by himself, and does it with that patented Scottish attitude and wit to spare.

Her makeup is epic. And I love that Scotty calls her Lassie. And she calls him Montgomery Scotty!

Am I missing someone? Ha -- just kidding. In movies like this, the lead is rarely the character I love most, but Chris Pine's Captain James T. Kirk will always be a character worth admiring, rooting for, and revolving an entire movie around. Here his arc was fairly predictable, but an avenue worth exploring and was handled well script-wise and performance-wise. There are no huge emotional scenes, but that doesn't matter with Pine. He mixes the subtle depths of Kirk evenly into every moment and brings an important weight to the story and his loyal, smirking, and heroic Captain. The villain he faces was a surprising downside. Idris Elba brings the intimidation and the turmoil, but unfortunately was landed with the side of the script that was dotted with holes. In the end Krall was too flimsy to be convincing or memorable. He got the job done, but only just.

He belongs in that captain's chair.

In fact, that's a pretty accurate description of the film as a whole: it gets the job done. Not glamorously or impressively or mind-bendingly, but with a solid amount of fun and excitement, and a decent amount of throwing back and respect for what it is continuing. And the job really is to showcase the characters. What surrounds them may not be as spectacular as it has been before, but the characters themselves are every bit as worth spending time with as they ever were. The plot may not be terribly smart, but the smartest thing the film does was a great choice; to pair off the characters into groups were they brought out the best, and the most interesting sides in each other.

Beyond is an enjoyable caper into the unexplored reaches of space; comparatively inferior in quality to the installments actually helmed by Abrams, but for fans of the new franchise, no less worthwhile by its own right. In a few ways it is flawed superficially, but at its heart holds onto what makes these adventures worth the trip -- the iconic and lovable captain and crew of the USS Enterprise.

Upcoming Movie Roundup - July

Last month was theater-free for me. Warcraft tempted me a few times, as did May's X-Men: Apocalypse, and I even made an agreement with my brothers that if Independence Day: Resurgence got good enough reviews we'd go see all three -- but it didn't, and we didn't see the other two either. However, I did finally see one March movie that I would have gone to the theater for if it had actually played in my theater -- Midnight Special! I took a small risk and bought it, pretty confident that I'd like it and it paid off spectacularly! Not only did I love the film more than enough to want to watch it multiple times, it was also worth it for some neat and informing special features. A review will be incoming soon, but I'll go ahead and say that I strongly recommend it.

How was your month of June? And how is your July looking? Happy Summer!


The Legend of Tarzan
Jul 1st; PG-13
I'm pretty much only mentioning this one because I thought it looked interesting before any reviews came out.  Now, of course, it seems obvious that it would be no good -- now that I've actually sat down and watched the trailer. I didn't expect it'd be great, but I probably should have seen a low RT score like this coming. The adventure appeal of it distracted me a little. And someday, if ever I can get it for free and am feeling resilient to disappointment, I probably won't be able to help myself from watching it for that same reason.




The BFG
Jul 1st; PG
The latest from Steven Spielberg is a kiddie movie based on a book. Giants and magic and sweeping music is involved. I like Spielberg (who doesn't?) and the cast has Mark Rylance and Jemaine Clement who are great (but they're both playing animated giants so you can't actually see them, though the BFG does look quite a lot like Rylance (I actually recognized his face before I did his voice)) and it looks like a good kid's adventure movie, but maybe not quite to the point where it'd be a great movie for adults too. Especially for people like me who don't have a sentimental attachment. Still, the director and cast practically guarantees that I'll wind up seeing it someday. And I wouldn't be surprised if I enjoyed it.




Ghostbusters
Jul 15th; PG-13
Da-da da-da. Dada da-da da-da. Okay, no. I debated even mentioning this one, but decided to so that I could voice my opinion of how much I wish this movie didn't even exist. Based on the epic number of dislikes on the trailer, most people share my opinion, but I wanted to make my view clear anyway. Set out to attempt to destroy the classic by association, and so steeped in extreme feminism that all criticism of it has been (and probably will continue to be) labeled sexist, this is a film that I am happy to announce I will completely avoid for all eternity. The trailer is painfully unfunny, and the idea is completely pointless. Who you gonna call? The real, ORIGINAL Ghostbusters.




Cafe Society
Jul 15th; PG-13
Woody Allen's latest venture is set in the 30's, and focuses on the glamorous life of society people in Hollywood and New York through the eyes of Jesse Eisenberg. Also starring Kristen Stewart, Blake Lively, Steve Carell, and Corey Stoll. This one seems slightly similar to Midnight in Paris which is my favorite of Allen's films. It look like it has lots of vintage style and classic Allen-esque quirky conversations. Early reviews aren't as promising as my previously mentioned favorite's, but I think it'll turn out to be worth a look.




Equals
Jul 15th; PG-13
Another Kristen Stewart movie. Sometimes I surprise myself by watching her movies, but then I remember that I've never actually disliked her in anything -- and she's slowly wearing off the stain of Twilight... Anyway in this one Nicholas Hoult co-stars and it's a sci-fi, so it certainly has my attention. It does look very moody though, and that may very well be a downfall. But I'm pretty sure I'm gonna have to find out for myself.




Star Trek Beyond
Jul 22nd; Not rated yet
This is hands-down the most exciting release of the month, yet it has a a very sad side to it, because of the untimely and tragic death of Anton Yelchin who plays the fan-favorite Chekov. He will be sorely missed in the years to come. Beyond doesn't have the guaranteed success that Into Darkness seemed to either because of the new director coming on board. However, I think, and have thought from the first that this installment looks every bit as good as the last one. I like the episodic, smaller-scale nature it seems to be bringing, and am very excited to see how Simon Pegg's script turned out. A definite must-see!




Jason Bourne
Jul 29th; PG-13
Bourne is back and bigger than ever. Actually, I'm not sure "bigger than ever" is a good thing; at some point things are going to go over the top, and the grounded feel of the previous Matt Damon Bourne's was a huge part of the appeal. However, I doubt it'll matter much -- this film looks solid. With Damon and Greengrass back, how could it not? Julia Stiles is back too, and it's also got Tommy Lee Jones, and Alicia Vikander, which means promises of good things. This may very well be a must-see as well!

Upcoming Movie Roundup - April

Last month I surprised myself, and saw a movie in theaters that I didn't even include in my March roundup. I was planning to mention 10 Cloverfield Lane, but decided against it just as I was about to watch the trailer, because I realized I didn't have anything to say about it. I didn't know anything about it, and didn't want to -- I didn't even want to see the trailer -- I just had an interest in seeing the movie. So one night I was like, "Hey guys, wanna watch Cloverfield?" and my brothers were like, "Sure." So we did. And once it was over I was like, "Should we go see 10 Cloverfield Lane tomorrow?" and they were like, "Heck yes." So we did. And you can read my spoiler-free review of it here, but honestly you shouldn't unless you've seen it already. I'll just say that it's the kind of movie that reminds me of why I love movies in the first place. So I guess I should have mentioned it, but at the same time, I'm glad I didn't -- and didn't look into it too much.

Usually looking through the new releases of the month introduces me to a few lesser known releases that pique my interest, but not so much this time. And the bigger releases aren't hugely exciting either. You never know, but right now it looks like I may be saving my money for Civil War!

My thoughts on one of these is not true -- for April Fool's Day -- guess which one?


Hardcore Henry
April 8th: R
It stars my personal favorite Sharlto Copley, it's exclusively shot from first person perspective, and it's currently getting lots of praise for it's unique and fun non-stop and innovative action and impressively involving plot line. It is the only movie on this list that I'm currently planning to see, but the only problem is that the rating is too much for me. So I'll wait until I can watch it cut, when I plan to enjoy the heck out of it!




High Strung
April 8th: PG
About a ballet dancer and a violin player who "don't fit in" and go up against the odds, this looks like a nice, appropriate dancing movie with a slight music-twist that will be very appealing to fans of the genre. It looks predictable, a little sentimental, and not terribly deep, but hey -- that's the way these kinds of film's work best.




The Jungle Book
April 15th: PG
The new, live action Jungle Book. Well, so far it's been a lot of showmanship. It's got a good-looking cast, and obviously takes much pride in the appearance of its realistically animated jungle animals. (Am I the only one wondering why they're so disproportionately large jungle animals though?) This trailer shows that the film seems to actually have a plot, and there's a lot of hype, but I still need to be convinced that it's gonna be, you know, a good movie.




The Green Room
April 15th; R
"Strong brutal graphic violence" the rating explanation says. I've never seen a violence rating look so foreboding before! Anyway this one's a horror film staring Patrick Stewart as the villain, and among others, Anton Yelchin and Imogen Poots as his victims. I like Anton Yelchin a lot, but this one looks too scary for me. I'm not pulled that far into the horror genre! It's getting high reviews though, so it looks like a hit for those who are...




Paradox
April 15th(limited); NR
A murder mystery with time travel? Sounds like my kind of mash-up. There's not much to find out about this film (it doesn't even have a rating yet) and it doesn't have to look of a really great film, but if it delivers on the promises it makes in the trailer and is decent enough, and can definitely see myself watching it someday.




The Huntsman: Winter's War
April 22nd; PG-13
Uuuuuhhh. Well, at least there's no Kristen Stewart! That means it has to be better than the other one, right? Honestly this prequel to Snow White and the Huntsman does look better. It focuses on more interesting characters and doesn't have the pretense of following a fairy tale. Of course since it's a prequel, we know more or less how it will end -- with the villain undefeated -- which will probably be unsatisfying. Anyway, even if it is better, that by no means guarantees it'll be good.



APRIL FOOL! I lied about lying about one of the movies. I know. I'm such an evil April Fools genius. Or I'm just lazy. One of those. Happy April Fools Day everyone! Don't write with strange pens and be sure to check under your seat cushions!

Upcoming Movie Roundup - April

In March all went according to plan, I saw my two movies, Cinderella and Insurgent (click to read my reviews) and while Cinderella was significantly the more magical, neither disappointed. We finally got a good month of film releases! But now, all the REALLY good movies have to wait for summer, (which, yes, starts in May for movies, because, Avengers) so it appears we are back to mediocre for poor little old April. This time my basic plan is: wait for May.

Is your plan the same as mine, or do you have April movie plans? Tell me in the comments!

Furious 7
April 3rd; PG-13
I saw number 6 of this franchise (because it was free and it had Luke Evans in it) with next to no background knowledge to help me and still enjoyed it's stylish over-the-top action-packed-ness very much. I have no current plans to see the whole franchise, but what with my brothers and I liking the fun ridiculousness of over-the-top action it seems very likely that I'll see this latest one eventually. Apparently it's the best yet, and a sweet farewell to Paul Walker.




The Longest Ride
April 10th; PG-13
Typically I'm not interested in any movie attached to Nicholas Sparks, but there always seems to be some small exception. In this case my mom read the book and claims it's his best ever. Her dream cast was Jennifer Lawrence and Chris Pine (or was it Liam Hemsworth?) and instead they got some (cheaper, naturally) look-alikes. The trailer doesn't do anything good for it's chances, but I think the biggest deciding factor is if my mom's interested enough to get us to watch it, not me.




Broken Horses
April 10th; R
I always want to watch anything that has Anton Yelchin in it, (latest example) and so far it's never caused me disappointment. But this is certainly the kind of movie I wouldn't even include on this list if it weren't for his name being in the cast list. It looks dark, tense, violent and creepy. But I will be keeping my eye on it.




The Age of Adaline
April 24; PG-13
As if the Nicholas Sparks release wasn't enough -- there's also this sci-fi-ish romantic drama about a woman who never ages after an accident in the 30's. This one has me interested more though, for the style, the eras she will live through, and the intrigue of wanting to know how it all ends. Plus the trailer just makes it look like a more elegant, quality film. But I'm keeping my interest on hold until I see what the critics think. I doubt I'll consider it worth my time if it's just a bunch of drama that never goes anywhere except through eighty years.




Avengers: Age of Ultron
May 1st; PG-13
Yes, this one comes out in May, and I said I was waiting until May, but I just can't. Anyway, ideally, I'll see this movie before I actually post my May edition of this post series, so I thought I'd say my peace now, and then I can say some more later if I need to. Really, the only thing to say is that if I had to choose only one movie to see this whole year, I would choose this one without hesitation (then I would take it back, and think about picking Star Wars 7 instead, but eventually end up with this one after all because I just love the Avengers so much). It's going to be huge, and I'm very, very excited that it's only one month away!

Odd Thomas

This review is spoiler-free.

He's pretty familiar with death. He can see dead people, and they can tell him how they died. Sometimes he can even tell when death is coming. He is clairvoyant, or psychic, or something; he's gifted, he's weird, he's strange. He is odd -- Odd Thomas.

And that's not just a title or nickname, that's his real name. A name he lives up to every day, because not only can he see dead people, he feels a responsibility to do something about it -- like, maybe apprehend their murderer -- which can get some strange looks as he chases people down the street. He also doesn't want anyone to discover his gifts. Then they might start calling him more than "Odd."

Guess why I wanted to see this movie. I'll give you a few hints -- it wasn't for the ghosts, and is pictured here. Give up?

Anton Yelchin plays our paranormal crime solving weirdo. He was the reason I wanted to give this obscure movie a shot, and ultimately he was the reason I was happy I did. Odd isn't actually that strange acting, he's mostly just an unusually endearing, enthusiastic twenty-something with an overload of charming confidence. Think a classic jaded noir mystery film PI, but young and modern, and, well, happier -- for the most part. He even does the narration, explaining things to the audience that might be tedious to understand otherwise, and cracking one-liners like the best of them. Narrations can go either way with me, and this one is a winner.

The only people who know about Odd's abilities is his girlfriend, Stormy (see, everyone in this movie has interesting names) played by Addison Timlin, and the local Sheriff, played by Willem Dafoe. Though he tries to keep her out of his escapades, Stormy is often his backup; the Ned to his Nancy Drew; the Dr. Watson to his Sherlock Holmes. And Sheriff Porter is the go-to guy once the bad guys have been caught, and Odd needs a good cover story to keep his secret safe.

Strange Weather.

Because the film is not rated, I'm going to put a little content review here. I'd give it a PG-13, for a little bit of language, plus brief strong language; a bit of sexual content, plus one girl in some revealing underwear; lots and lots of scary/tense/suspenseful moments, a good amount of out-and-out violence, and some disturbing/gross moments. Also, there are some disturbing creatures. The violence and creepiness was definitely the worst of it, but that I didn't mind as much at all. And I was glad for how well the scary and suspenseful was balanced with comedy.

In fact my favorite aspect has to be the comedy. The script had some great humor for all the characters, but mostly for Odd. Odd practically never stops talking between his narrating inner thoughts and his real-life penchant for hearing his own voice say smart-alack-y things, and as long as he's saying words, he never stops spinning them out with a generous helping of wit. Watching him put together the pieces of a puzzle was so fun and exciting, not necessarily because of what he was figuring out, but because of the way he went about figuring it.

Short-order cook by day, crime-solver by-- well, day and night actually.

As for the plot and the mystery, it kept me guessing, and in the end made a good amount of sense with one or two small holes -- but no more than you'd find in a popular American TV crime drama any night of the week. However, if Steven Moffat tried to pass it off as a Sherlock episode, people would doubtlessly be disappointed. It's all about context though -- I didn't expect a Sherlockian-type complexity, I just wanted to see Anton Yelchin fight evil, and the mystery allowed for that with amusing style. And in the end I was even impressed at how sensible it was -- never trying too hard to outdo anything, or take on more than it could handle, just skipping along happily to the beat of its own witty little drum.

Odd Thomas isn't breaking any new ground here, but some things never get old, especially when they're done with a heart and a soul, a dashing hero, and a cheerfully cynical attitude.

Upcoming Movie Roundup - October

Last month I actually went and saw a movie I wanted to go and see! The Maze Runner -- and it lived up to it's potential impressively -- click here for my spoiler-free review of it. Now, October.

Look out -- here come ALL THE MOVIES. Not really, but really, there are a lot of new movie this month. Yikes. Which one do you want to see? Which ones have I left out? Which ones should I have not included because they're definitely going to be terrible? Leave a comment -- I need to know these things!


Left Behind
Oct. 3rd (limited); PG-13
I may be the only person in the entire homeschooling Christian community who never read these books. I was never much of a reader as a young person. But even if I had, I don't know if I would be any more interested in this. The RT synopsis makes it sound like just another end-of-the-world/disaster movie like 2012 or The Day After Tomorrow, but then the trailer looks more like one of those "Christian" movies that only Christians will see. Neither bode very well.




Dracula Untold
Oct. 10th; PG-13
Of course I will always want to watch any movie Luke Evans appears in, ever since he made my favorite character from The Hobbit book my favorite of The Hobbit movies as well. I would watch this the exact moment I see it come on TV in a couple years, based on the Luke Evans in a stylized action movie awesomeness, but then there's the vampire thing. There's always something, isn't there?




Alexander and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Day
Oct. 10th; PG
This looks cheesy. And silly. And kiddie. And I don't care; I want to see it. Anytime a movie releases that isn't animated, and is rated PG, you have to sit up and pay attention -- this is a dying breed. I wouldn't be surprised if it isn't a great film, but I fully expect it too be fun, and diverting... and silly and cheesy.




Whiplash
Oct. 10th (limited); R
This month in "Obscure Movies I'm Interested in Because of That One Actor and Wouldn't Be Otherwise" Part 1: "Miles Teller." Okay, and also, this one's getting great reviews as an intense character piece for Teller and J.K. Simmons.




Kill the Messenger
Oct. 10th (limited); R
Jeremy Renner delivers a message, and then is killed, while doing some great acting. That's what I'm assuming happens in this movie. (It's a true story, so I could find out easily, but where's the fun in that?) Does that assumption make me want to see it any less? (Or any more?) Nope. And, honestly, this would be a lot more interesting to me if it were not based on true events...




The Book of Life
Oct. 17th; PG
*Sighhh* I'm sorry, but why am I supposed to be interested in this? I don't know, so I guess I'm not. Here's the trailer anyway. If you want to see this, please tell me why so I can try to understand.




The Best of Me
Oct. 17th; PG-13
The latest in a very long line of Nicholas Sparks adaptations trying to find the same amount of success as The Notebook. This one has more of my attention than usual by having James Marsden and Michelle Monaghan in the cast. Still, chances of the sap being unbearable even for the cast? I'd say 94%. Also, enjoy as they blatantly steal from The Fault in Our Stars at the beginning of this trailer. (For the record, I agree with Shakespeare.)




Rudderless
Oct. 17th (limited); R
"Obscure Movies I'm Interested in Because of That One Actor and Wouldn't Be Otherwise" Part 2: "Anton Yelchin." Really, though, this looks pretty great. Just ignore Selena Gomez's face there....




Young Ones
Oct. 17th (limited); R
"Obscure Movies I'm Interested in Because of That One Actor and Wouldn't Be Otherwise" Part 3: "Nicholas Hoult." And fine, there's Elle Fanning too. And Michael Shannon. And seriously, this sci-fi/western style is pretty intriguing!




St. Vincent
Oct. 24th (limited); PG-13
Last, but absolutely, in no way least. Mark my words people: This one. This movie will be the best of the month. Bill Murray is an old grump in an upbeat, pop indie. How could this possibly go wrong? At the very worst it'll just be a vehicle for Murray to crack a bunch of jokes which will undoubtedly be funny, because when is Bill Murray ever not funny? I rest my case. Watch this trailer:

Like Crazy

It's a classic tale: boy meets girl, boy and girl fall in love, boy and girl's complete lack of self-control, and overwhelming need of controlling selfishness causes them to be separated, and puts their relationship on a rocky, one and a half hour melodramatic ride.

Anton Yelchin and Felicity Jones two great actors, and two of three reasons why I watched this movie.

Anna (Felicity Jones) is British, in L.A. to go to college, where she meets Jacob (Anton Yelchin). They fall in love. They cuddle a lot. He, a furniture designer, makes her a chair. She, a writer, writes him poems. They would be "that couple" whose PDA makes everyone else around them uncomfortable -- if they ever hung out with anyone else. (PG-13 level inappropriate content is infused throughout the movie, as you may expect.) And then they graduate, and she has to go back to England. Except they cannot bear to be separated, so, she doesn't. She stays with him all summer, until she flies over for a week and her friend's wedding, and then flies straight back. And that's when those pesky customs people won't let her through security because she overstayed her visa last time. Whoops. Cue many lingering shots of two depressed, lonely faces, thousands of miles apart.

The fact that they're sitting apart in this picture is nothing short of miracle. They were like magnets.

Of course the movie isn't the two of them pining for each other the whole time -- although sometimes it seems like it is. I took it all as a cautionary tale; a list of things you should not do once you found the person you think you're going to spend the rest of your life with. In fact I'm having a hard time thinking of anything these two did right. Their selfishness and impatience caused nothing but heartache (for more than themselves I may add) and it was a little unsettling, because it was so realistic.

And that unsettling, realistic feeling, for better or for worse, was enhanced greatly the performances. Both the characters seem like really nice, likeable people. They're actually likeable throughout the movie, though they do many dis-likeable things. The acting really is very good, and without Yelchin and Jones playing the characters, I probably wouldn't have managed to watch the whole thing (actually I wouldn't have started it in the first place). Oh, and there's also Jennifer Lawrence in a small portion of the movie. Now you know all three reasons why I wanted to see this. And because of those three, I don't regret seeing it either -- if they didn't make it enjoyable in a happy sense of the word, they at least made it interesting, and very, very well acted.

Just because my choices of pictures imply it, there were actually very few scenes on the beach... everything else these photos imply is accurate.

And I guess it's not completely unthinkable that this may be enjoyable as a romance for someone, I mean there's lots of romance -- shallow, sappy, selfish romance, but people do seem to like that occasionally; look at Romeo and Juliet. Less people die in Like Crazy, so I guess that's good for them, but then again, Romeo and Juliet is considerably more poetic, and a Shakespeare classic, so really there's no point in comparing them... except to prove that Like Crazy is supposed to be a romance, and I think that's done. Moving on.

Actually I guess that's it. This movie was very successful and making not much content be interesting with character study; teaches a lesson that I already knew, but teaches it very well anyway; and was made with thoughtfulness, and just as much care as its characters were careless. And while it's by no means a feel-good romantic movie, I wouldn't say either that it was at all bad -- artistically at least. And I finally understand the title (I thought I did before, but I actually do now) because those two kids were, like, crazy.

Upcoming Movie Roundup - April

None of the March releases were impressive enough to get me in a theater, but that wasn't unexpected. It looks like April's interesting new releases have a theme of sorts; great casts, with at least one particularly cool addition (in my opinion anyway) per movie. (Or maybe that's the theme of all movies I find interesting... that's a thought.) However, there's still only one must-see, but it's looking to be a good one.

Draft Day
April 11th; PG-13
Probably the most anticipated film releasing this month and with good cause. By the trailer and TV spots I've seen this looks to be another great, epic and inspiring sports movie from Kevin Costner who's still going strong. Certainly will be more exciting and insightful into the behind the scenes of sports than Moneyball, if only because it's about the much more exciting and popular game of Football instead of Baseball. And what a cast--- okay that's it, I can't go on -- happy April fools day; now let's get on to the good and real stuff. Except I guess I have to include the trailer for appearance's sake:



Captain America: The Winter Soldier
April 4th; PG-13
Without a doubt this is the most widely anticipated film this month. And the closer it gets to its release date the more excited I grow in anticipation of seeing, it due to the flood of positive reviews, some going so far as to say Cap and Marvel had raised the superhero bar yet again. That's enough for me, but I also like the the idea that it's more of an espionage thriller with superheros, and the fact that Scarlett Johansson's Black Widow looks to be just as much of a main character as Chris Evans' Cap -- I'm excited to see the dynamic they create together. Anthony Mackie is the new addition to non-super-powered superheroes, and I'm very interested in what Frank Grillo's character will be up to.




Rio 2
April 11th; G
Okay, so I've seen... most of Rio. And I liked it, but obviously didn't love it enough to make the effort to see the entire thing. And this sequel will probably land at the same level of mild interest, as long as the reviews generally give the same amount of praise -- in spite of my discovery from watching this trailer that New Zealander comedian Jemaine Clement is the baddie for both films, plus of course Anne Hathaway and Jesse Eisenberg, makes a cool cast. And the sequel adds Kristin Chenoweth as the baddie's tiny tree frog sidekick. That one's a no-brainer.




Only Lovers Left Alive
April 11th (limited); R
On one hand, a cast that includes Tom Hiddleston and Anton Yechin -- and also Tilda Swinton, Mia Wasikowska and John Hurt, (yes, John Hurt plays a vampire, I swear this is not an April Fools joke) but mostly the former two -- sounds like a dream cast, and way too awesome to be actually true, but it is. But, on the other hand I honestly have no desire to see a movie about vampires... (no matter how removed from, or better than... other vampire movies... it is) it just doesn't appeal to me at all. Except... what a cast.




Transcendence
April 18th; PG-13
By the trailer it feels like a Chris Nolan film, and it's cast like one too, and that's probably because of the director, Wally Pfister, who has been Nolan's director of photography in his every film since Memento. However, this is Pfister's first film as director, so that raises a spark of suspicion, which will hopefully go unfounded. I don't see this being ground-breaking, or, say, transcending (get it?) any AI film we've seen before, but I do have high hopes of it being worthy exciting installment in the genre. There's Johny Depp and Rebecca Hall leading, Paul Bettany and Cillian Murphy for me, Kate Mara, for some reason I suppose, and Morgan Freeman to ensure the Nolan association. Here's to it all coming together.



What new films have tickled your fancy this fine Spring month? Anything besides Captain America? Something rather than Captain America?

Star Trek Into Darkness

Ah, space. The final frontier. Four years after the original reboot, J.J. Abrams and co. are back continuing to boldly breathe new life into the beloved franchise. Not exactly going where no one has gone before, but certainly presenting it like we've never seen it before.

So I don't give away anything that might be taken for spoilers, I'll not try and sum up the plot, but just say this: the stakes are high, as are the emotions, and Kirk and his crew set out to make everything right, pitted against the stupendous Benedict Cumberbatch as the terrorist John Harrison. Epic, action-adventure stuff ensues. Big time.

Kirk, Uhura and Spock loose the colored shirts and go full-fledged-leather-and-guns-action-hero-y on us.

The cast, if you can believe it, has actually improved from last time. Not just in additions, like the fore mentioned stupendous Cumberbatch and other newcomer Alice Eve as science officer Carol Marcus, but the returning cast shows improvements as well, and considering how impressive they were at first, that's really something. The actors found their footing in the loved characters very quickly and gave solid, wonderfully nostalgic performances in Star Trek; now, they've really settled in. Now, they own their characters, and have slightly re-molded them to fit perfectly, so the character complements the actor, who in turn complements the character, with heightened results.

I was especially impressed with Spock (Zachary Quinto) in this case. Spock's struggle with emotions is pretty much the only struggle he ever has, and therefore it can easily be overdone and I imagine could get annoying very easily. I have to imagine, because Spock's character this time around is one of those improvements I was talking about. I have never liked him more than I did in this movie, and Quinto's performance was at times, breath-taking.

"Epic Spock" is in a volcano.

The only performance more powerful than his, was that of Benedict Cumberbatch in the role of the villain. He continues to blow me away everywhere I see him. You would think I would get used to it, but no, he gets me every time. Even scene after scene he only gets more and more impressive. And I can't even begin to describe my excitement at seeing and hearing him being casually mentioned almost everywhere. I feel like a total hipster -- "I was a fan of the Cumberbatch before he landed starring roles..."

"You being all mysterious with your... cheekbones. And turning your coat collar up so you look cool." "I don't do that." "Yes you do." Oh Watson, you have no idea.

Chris Pine has found the right balance between Kirk's heroic, leading side and his more skirt-chasing, rule-breaking side. Kirk will never be a perfect, Captain America type hero, but seriously, who would like him if he was? Pine's Kirk is a great flawed hero, and a great leader for his crew and the franchise, and is another name to my list of great performances in this film. He is also undeniably amazing at getting beat up, and hanging over very long, deadly falls.

See? I love this pic. Also, this whole sequence.

Scotty (Simon Pegg) made up for not being introduced until halfway through the first movie by having a rather big role this time, and adding some seriousness to the character as well... not too much though -- he still gets the funniest bit of the movie, just as he should.

Zoe Saldana's Uhura is now officially one of the boys, er, as close as she can get. Uhura is quite the action star now, and by my reckoning has moved up a couple notches in terms of character importance. I don't want to seem like I'm complaining, because I like her, and she adds wonderfully to the film in every way -- action, humor, emotion...

But, I really wish Bones (Karl Urban) had a big a role as Uhura this time around. When there are so many characters, and only about two hours of film to put them in, it's hard for anyone (except Joss Whedon) to give everyone the time and development they deserve. Unfortunately, Karl Urban and Bones didn't get as much as I thought they deserved. His character was overshadowed by Harrison, Uhura and even Scotty a little, and was limited too much to punch lines for my taste, but maybe I'm a bit too biased; he is my favorite character currently. Still, whenever he was there, he was as good as he could be, and I was happy.

What's he doing here? Being awesome of course.

Chekov (Anton Yelchin) got the same treatment, though I suppose I really shouldn't have expected his character to get any more important. He had his moments, fleeting as they were, and I relished them. The same mostly goes John Cho and Sulu too, though I don't care as much for the character, so I didn't mind as much. He got his moment too, and boy, was it a good one.

I'm actually really surprised I found a nice promo photo of just him!

Well. That's a lot about the characters. In the end, they are absolutely my favorite feature in this movie, even though my two favorite characters never got all the screen time I was hoping they'd receive. Still, I should probably touch on a few more topics before I wrap up.

What would a Star Trek movie be, after all, without some knockout visuals? If you saw the '09 Star Trek you know what to expect, but you'll still probably get blown away by some really stunning moments. Some, they show in the trailer, but they can't show them all early; there's way too many. I was a little afraid going in that it's self-proclaimed "non-stop action" would be too relentless, but it's well-paced at one step below "overwhelmingly fast" with tons of energy distributed evenly throughout, even into the slower moments, just under the surface.

Bones: "I hate this!" Kirk: "I know you do!" Yeah, but we love it.

I may have a complaint now, or at least something that comes close to the category; this movie is a near exact replica of it predecessor. Of course it's not if you look at the details, and of course the plot is way different, but in a broad sense, many things needlessly reflect the last movie, like the opening format, the closing format, and at least one all but re-used moment. Nevertheless, it was a great opening, the ending made me smile, and before I noticed that re-used moment was re-used, it took my breath away. So really, how could I complain? It's the principle of the thing that slightly bothers me, and I can't help but enjoy the product simultaneously.

So I guess you could say J.J. Abrams has done it again (Literally). It took four years, but the wait was absolutely worth it. Star Trek Into Darkness has "summer blockbuster" written all over it; it's thrilling and stunning and smart, laugh-out-loud funny, powerful and moving, all wrapped up together in an explosive package. A dazzling contribution to what will hopefully continue along this path to be a very long-running reboot/parallel universe of a really great franchise.